Smith v. State
This text of 87 S.E. 713 (Smith v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. The trial judge did not abuse his discretion in overruling the motion for a continuance.
2. There' was no error in this case in admitting the evidence against the [481]*481defendant, though it was obtained by an illegal search of his premises. Duren v. Thomasville, 125 Ga. 1 (53 S. E. 814); McAllister v. State, 17 Ga. App. 159 (86 S. E. 412).
3. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
87 S.E. 713, 17 Ga. App. 480, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-state-gactapp-1916.